New Delhi: KAnalysis, a Delhi-based corporate and IPR law firm, has formally challenged former cricketer Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s attempt to trademark “Captain Cool” for exclusive use in sports training, coaching services, and training centres.
Filed originally on 5 June, 2023, the application status was accepted and advertised by the Kolkata Office of Trade Marks Registry portal and published in the official trademark journal on 16 June, 2025.
A 120-day window opens once a trademark is published—mid-October 2025 in this case—to file an objection.
This could include any individual, company, or watchdog group that believes the mark might mislead consumers or violate existing rights, or even unfairly claim ownership over a commonly used phrase. Here, KAnalysis has formally challenged the trademark application, arguing that it’s a “generic and non-distinctive mark”. It has also flagged procedural irregularities, which it alleges the Trade Marks Registry overlooked.
“KAnalysis strongly believes that granting exclusive rights over a commonly used and generic term, merely based on celebrity status, sets a dangerous precedent for India’s IP ecosystem,” said Nilanshu Shekhar, the lead attorney on the matter in a statement. Adding, “Trademarks are about distinctiveness and source identification—not personal acclaim.”
Brand creation is central to trademark protection.
In trademark law, a generic term refers to a word or phrase that is commonly used to identify a type or category of goods or services, rather than a specific source or brand. Generic terms cannot be protected as trademarks because they are considered public domain—no single business can monopolize words that describe a general class of products.
In the trademark world, brand creation forms the very foundation of what a trademark seeks to safeguard. A trademark exists to identify and distinguish a product or service from others in the market. Without a developed brand identity, a trademark has nothing substantial to protect.
The more distinctive, consistent, and well-known a brand becomes, the stronger the legal protection it enjoys under trademark law and the easier it is to prove consumer association in case of infringement.
Speaking to ThePrint, the lawyer Ashutosh Choudhary from KAnalysis said, “In this trademark, the registry made a lot of mistakes, the process wasn’t followed. Maybe the examiner was a huge fan of Mr Dhoni but it’s about the law. There was a trademark with the name of ‘Captain Cool’ already registered as a trademark in 2021 and Mr Dhoni’s trademark was under prosecution due to that trademark (by Prabha Skill Sports). So, the rule is that until that (the first) trademark isn’t abandoned, you cannot accept another trademark. In the present case, the (the previous) trademark is also in force.”
In essence, KAnalysis contends that the Trade Marks Registry’s move to process is a procedural flaw, since the “Captain Cool” trademark is already allotted to another company and is an existing one. As per the rules governing trademarks, the Registry should have sent a mandatory notice to Prabha Skills Sports, which the law firm alleges was not done in this case.
Chaudhary pointed to what he described as a contradiction in Dhoni’s application. While the former Indian cricket captain’s application says he proposes to use the trademark, which means he is not using it at present, his affidavit, filed pursuant to the hearings, claims he has been using it since 2008.
“When you file a trademark application, you need to mention whether you are using it already or you are filing it (under) ‘proposed to be used’. In this case, Dhoni had filed this application under ‘proposed to be used’. This means that he is not using that trademark and he will use it in the future,” Chaudhary said, explaining the process.
Adding, “There were 3 hearings, and after that, Dhoni’s attorney filed that they have been using this trademark since 2008. Now, when you say this, you need to provide some evidence about how you are using this trademark and in which name you’re using it. The evidence is required with the date and the affidavit.”
About Dhoni’s claim of using the tag “Captain Cool” since 2008, Choudhary said, “In Dhoni’s affidavit, it is mentioned that he has been using this trademark since 2008 but he will provide the evidence when it is asked.
“This is not the evidence. But as it was coming from Dhoni’s side, they (trademark registry) accepted it. This is not their work, their work is to check the authenticity of the affidavit and the evidence, and based on that, accept the evidence or reject that. It should not be accepted later because the rule is to check the evidence; not to provide the affidavit later. In this case, it is certain that they (trademark registry) are not following the law.”
Asked about what the firm plans to do next, he said “Now that I’ve opposed this, now Dhoni’s side has a certain amount of time to reply to it and after that the trademark office will check that, there will be hearings and will be a long process. But the main part is that even the trademark office has to follow rules and Mr Dhoni’s side too has to follow the rules and provide evidence. Then we will see and check whether it really was used by Dhoni since 2008 or not and in what way (was it used by him).”
(Edited by Riju Chanda)
Also Read: Dhoni wants to trademark ‘Captain Cool’. Why patent office accepted his application